Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows • Hacker News Board

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#401

Post by quadrifoliate » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:22 AM UTC

nautilius wrote: post #347

quadrifoliate wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, it is hard for me to properly grasp the fact that the UK almost seems closer to Saudi Arabia than the US in this regard. It does not seem like having a "fuck imperialism" sign should ever get you arrested in a country that is supposedly one of the closest allies of the US.

Yeah, nothing like being arrested _and sentenced to four years in prison_ for talking to a cop while being black, in the land of the free, where this would NEVER happen because of some often-invoked 1st amendment. https://www.npr.org/2022/09/06/1121322520/a-black-protester-...

It was not my intention to say, for instance, that the US is not deeply racist; which is central to the case you quoted. It's likely far more so than the UK.

But the principle of freedom of speech seems generally more accepted, which is why Brittany Martin's case would be recognized by most Americans here for the racist outrage that it is. On the other hand, you have UK people elsewhere in the thread shrugging "yeah, that's a law" [1]), which is what was surprising to me.

----------------------------------------

[1] An example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32817744

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#402

Post by opportune » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:23 AM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #390

austinjp wrote: post #327

The UK media (not just the BBC) continue to profess "amazement" at the speed and efficiency of the transitioning from a dead monarch to a living one. There's been much speaking in awed tones at the pace of the various proclamations, committee meetings, document signings, etc, as if this pace tells us why we should be impressed. Personally I've found it borderline sickening. If there was a curtain that could have slip…

One thing I will never understand about people who pretty much hate where they live for one reason or another: Why don't they leave? Seriously. I am not taking sides here. I have visited the UK as a tourist and on business a zillion times over the last four decades. And yet, I am not qualified to voice opinion as to the realities of living there. From the outside, as someone visiting from the US, for lack of a better…

One thing I will never understand about people who argue with others preferences on the internet: Why don’t they just not post? I don’t understand people who read and reply to posts they hate.

Maybe it’s because the OP overall likes the country but wants it to be better? Not everyone even has the option of voting with their feet, and for many others though they could, it means leaving behind a lifetime of friends and family for a less familiar setting. By your logic why do we even vote or have opinions on things when we could physically remove ourselves from them?

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#403

Post by jdkee » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:23 AM UTC

opportune wrote: post #391

alphaddx wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely interested to know what you think should happen after a monarch passes. This has been the process for over 1000 years and while we have a constitutional monarchy this is what happens. I'm actually not in favour of a monarchy myself but I don't get how people would be surprised at what's currently happening.

That person may be from a culture with no monarchy. As an American I find the whole process and institution disgusting (yes, before you type out a clever reply, I know we have our own problems and I also probably find those disgusting). So many resources dedicated to one family with no real functional role and not even a veneer of merit… I think part of it is that culturally the British monarchy is the most relevant…

The constant drumbeat in the news media of the royal family's dedication to "service". How is gorging on the public's teat while maintaining a $25 billion family "business" that is exempt from UK inheritance taxes in any way, shape or form consistent with liberal democracy?

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#404

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:26 AM UTC

opportune wrote: post #391

alphaddx wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely interested to know what you think should happen after a monarch passes. This has been the process for over 1000 years and while we have a constitutional monarchy this is what happens. I'm actually not in favour of a monarchy myself but I don't get how people would be surprised at what's currently happening.

That person may be from a culture with no monarchy. As an American I find the whole process and institution disgusting (yes, before you type out a clever reply, I know we have our own problems and I also probably find those disgusting). So many resources dedicated to one family with no real functional role and not even a veneer of merit… I think part of it is that culturally the British monarchy is the most relevant…

No post body was provided.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#405

Post by MereInterest » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:26 AM UTC

brutusborn wrote: post #339

austinjp wrote: post #327

The UK media (not just the BBC) continue to profess "amazement" at the speed and efficiency of the transitioning from a dead monarch to a living one. There's been much speaking in awed tones at the pace of the various proclamations, committee meetings, document signings, etc, as if this pace tells us why we should be impressed. Personally I've found it borderline sickening. If there was a curtain that could have slip…

What is sickening about a smooth transition of power? The main thing you seem to criticise is the ritual itself, which to me seems pretty normal, albeit grandiose.

There's absolutely nothing sickening about smooth transitions of power between elected officials.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#406

Post by chasil » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:28 AM UTC

cpleppert wrote: post #393

chasil wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Au contraire. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/queens-conse... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/08/queen-... "Queen’s consent is a procedural rule, internal to the workings of parliament and of unclear origins, which requires the monarch’s consent to be obtained for certain types of legislation – before they can be presented for final approval by either house of parliament." Also note…

Kings/Queens consent is for legislation affecting the royal household. Parliament is not bound by the monarch's consent in any case. Every appointed member of the house of lords and the supreme court is appointed on the advice of the prime minister and cabinet.

I daresay you are a royalist.

"We now know there has been a persistent practice of applying those criteria so broadly that significant amounts of legislation regulating otherwise quite ordinary activities have required consent. The Queen pays tax, so (for example) finance laws require consent. The Queen is an employer, so (for example) child support and pensions laws require consent. And so on. Quite superficial connections to the interests of the crown are sufficient to trigger the Queen’s involvement.

"Even less information has been available on the substance of the process once triggered. All correspondence containing requests for consent, replies and the documentation of any related discussions have always been shrouded in absolute privacy. The only clue to their existence is the routine formulaic confirmation in parliament whenever consent has been given, which reveals nothing about the process through which that consent was secured. So it has been impossible to ascertain whether this is an essentially symbolic process, comparable with royal assent and perhaps justifiable as symbolically acknowledging the Queen as a formal part of the legislature; or whether it provided (or had the potential to be used as) a genuine opportunity for the Queen to veto legislation or influence policy.

"But it is now clear this process is far from merely symbolic. The documents uncovered by the Guardian provide remarkable evidence that this process accords the Queen’s advisers a genuine opportunity to negotiate with the government over changes in proposed laws, that they do sometimes secure such changes before giving consent, and that they are even prepared to threaten to withhold consent to secure their policy preferences."

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#407

Post by opportune » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:28 AM UTC

jdkee wrote: post #403

opportune wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That person may be from a culture with no monarchy. As an American I find the whole process and institution disgusting (yes, before you type out a clever reply, I know we have our own problems and I also probably find those disgusting). So many resources dedicated to one family with no real functional role and not even a veneer of merit… I think part of it is that culturally the British monarchy is the most relevant…

The constant drumbeat in the news media of the royal family's dedication to "service". How is gorging on the public's teat while maintaining a $25 billion family "business" that is exempt from UK inheritance taxes in any way, shape or form consistent with liberal democracy?

Same tactic as the robber barons both new and old. Steal so much that giving away a fraction of it makes you seem like a saint. At least industrialists and (most) tech billionaires contributed something. A hereditary, neutered monarchy doesn’t contribute much at all beyond gossip and spectacle

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#408

Post by lern_too_spel » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:29 AM UTC

xani_ wrote: post #371

stjohnswarts wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get this, it's not like the king of england has any real power. I know it's a waste of tax money but the US governments wastes tax money all day long too, as do all governments on pork projects and subsidies.

The whole monarch clowfest does bring tourism in so it might be not complete waste of tax money

If you voted in a new royal family who had to consent to a reality TV show, you would get a lot more tourism. I hear the Osbournes are back in town.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#409

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:29 AM UTC

brutusborn wrote: post #339

austinjp wrote: post #327

The UK media (not just the BBC) continue to profess "amazement" at the speed and efficiency of the transitioning from a dead monarch to a living one. There's been much speaking in awed tones at the pace of the various proclamations, committee meetings, document signings, etc, as if this pace tells us why we should be impressed. Personally I've found it borderline sickening. If there was a curtain that could have slip…

What is sickening about a smooth transition of power? The main thing you seem to criticise is the ritual itself, which to me seems pretty normal, albeit grandiose.

[deleted]

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#410

Post by cpleppert » Tue, Sep 13, 2022, 2:31 AM UTC

HL33tibCe7 wrote: post #304

snickerbockers wrote: post #269

How much power does the British monarch still have? I'm from America so I didn't learn much in school about British history post-1776, but my understanding is that they never had an event like the French Revolution or American Revolution that suddenly ended their monarchy, just a long series of minor reductions in the royal family's power going back to the Magna Carta. From my own (admittedly uneducated on this topic…

Functionally zero. In theory, the monarch has power, but it is never exerted, because they know that if it was exerted a) it would be ignored, and b) they’d immediately be overthrown. They act as a head of state in the same way that e.g: Germany has a President. Noble ranks like Duke and Baron are also completely irrelevant to governance. Lords _are_ relevant, on the other hand. They form the House of Lords, which pl…

Practically, the UK Monarch (or Japanese emperor) has no discretionary political power at all. Republican Parliamentary systems usually leave some discretionary power to the head of state in either emergencies or for the purpose choosing a party to attempt to form a government.

Hereditary Lords (i.e. the noble aristocracy in the UK) have almost no political power. The ninety or so still in the House of Lords are elected by fellow members of the House of Lords. The remainder (600+) of the peers are appointed by the party in power in the commons.